Dutfields Yard interior photograph, 1900

[Natalie Severn]

Re: the letter


Which, I'd like to add, is the exact opposite of the circumstances with the Dutfield's Yard photo. It has been shown to several people in a position to know what they're looking at. The very first thing Philip did was show it to experts in the field. They all agree.

Well Kelly,the archivists and other experts at our National Archives at Kew , object to those "Ripperologists" disputing the authenticity of their Sept 17th letter, which they hold under lock and key and only allow to be viewed after arrangement-one reason why few have yet seen it.And as yet,it certainly is not considered a fake by those experts.

[George Hutchinson]

Well, it's all getting confusing to me and I really must get to bed.

I'll just part with this for now - a lot of you are shaking heads in doubt when you actually know nothing about this image as yet. I have been researching it for eleven months, with help from the top people in the Ripper field (and you know I do mean the most respected people on this site when I say that - SPE, Colin, Rob McLaughlin, Jake, Rob...) and they have not a SHADOW of doubt about its authenticity.

It is one picture in an album (I later bought the remains of the album which was unsold) from 1900. The original owner was a writer who made excellent annotations under each box brownie shot stuck in the album. There were 59 shots from this European trip alone. This image simply had, written underneath it, SCENE OF THE FAMOUS WHITECHAPEL MURDERS and the seller sold the single image, removed from (but now reunited with) the album with a blurry eBay page photo that made it difficult to see what it was. I bought it with no knowledge of what the photo actually showed. Rob Clack saw the auction and didn't bid on it because the image looked unimportant on the eBay page.

Stan, I am disappointed you should think of me in such a way. I thought you knew me better than that. You will get to see it, and soon. I just had to find a way to make sure it could be seen without it being ripped off the site and used everywhere without control (yes, I admit I want to keep control over it but that's my right). The only reason I haven't posted it as soon as the Conference was over right onto Casebook and JTR Forums was because I didn't know of a way of doing it so people could see it without it being let off the leash. Spryder and I hit the same idea about the same time (as indeed, Janey has done with an e-mail she just sent me).

OK, this is the deal. Unless I hear good reason to the contrary not to do anything at all at this stage, the image will be posted, tomorrow, with clear watermarks on it bearing my name and copyright. I'd like to thank Steve for sending me the same without even asking for it.

Before some people start saying I'm STILL playing a game of cat and mouse, I'm not doing it now because I HAVE TO GO TO BED. I need to be around for the discussion that will follow and I can't do that when I'm asleep.

As for the possibility of me being duped by a fake... bloody Hell, don't you think with my experience in this aspect of Ripperology I'd know? And an elaborate fake to make the seller $5? Come on, people. Really.

PHILIP

[Monty]

I can confirm Kellys post above. Phil mailed it to a selection last year to ask their opinions, Jake, Rob, Colin and myself to name but a few.

I know Rob pinpointed the location and date due to the warehouse buildings in Backchurch lane.

Make no mistake, this is the real deal. Phil has worked a year on this and has investigated every avenue open to him.

[Dan Norder]

Well Kelly,the archivists and other experts at our National Archives at Kew , object to Ripperologists disputing the authenticity of the Sept 17th letter, which they hold under lock and key and only allow to be viewed after arrangement-one reason why few have yet seen it.

Oh, give me a break. Those people are not experts, they are bureaucrats, and ones who don't want to admit that someone was able to sneak in a false document. The Ripper experts dispute it, and they are the only ones who would know whether it is genuine.

And, seriously, if you want to argue this line of thought, PLEASE take it to a thread specifically about that letter. There are more than enough places here to talk about that topic, and it's extremely rude to make those arguments on this one.

[jmenges]

Philip has bought a picture off of EBAY...

Hold on a minute,

You might look into how much experience Philip has dealing on ebay, as a buyer and a seller, before you jump to the assumption that he could have been snookered. I have full confidence that Philip had researched this photo from all possible angles before he announced what he says he has.

He has a picture of Dutfields Yard. Otherwise he would not have said it.

Consider the source. You should at least give him the credit he deserves.

Edit- fast moving thread, many posts crossed before mine went up, so I'm just adding my voice to the choir.

JM

[George Hutchinson]

Stewart P Evans, I empathise with you at this moment more than ever before...

PHILIP

[Natalie Severn]

Oh, give me a break. Those people are not experts, they are bureaucrats, and ones who don't want to admit that someone was able to sneak in a false document. The Ripper experts dispute it, and they are the only ones who would know whether it is genuine.

And, seriously, if you want to argue this line of thought, PLEASE take it to a thread specifically about that letter. There are more than enough places here to talk about that topic, and it's extremely rude to make those arguments on this one.

I am not being rude,Dan-any way that sounds a bit like a pot and kettle kind of argument coming from you .Ally commented on none of us having seen this photo yet to be in a position to talk about it.I took Philip as his word that he was teasing us a little.Anna is wondering quite why you, Dan, are being so unpleasant to Mac,and trying moreover to convince others to be likewise,when all Mac was doing was pointing out how partisan some people can be on here.All perfectly in order and flowing from Ally"s original query.

[BillyE]

Hi Philip. Congratulations on your find. Ebay is the best, isn't it?! I do have a couple of questions about the photo, even though I haven't seen it. I hope to see it in a book someday. After watching the History Channel documentary you appeared in, "In the World of...Jack the Ripper" their computer recreation of Dutfield's Yard seems to go back for a hundred or more yards. I always imagined the yard going back no more than 10 to 20 yards. Given the information yeilded by the photo how far back do you estimate the yard to go? Also, what sort of debris is in the yard? I always imagined it a basic dumping ground for all sorts of stuff, such as barrels, wheelbarrows, scrap metal, human waste, and all the mind can imagine, most of it toward the back. What is visible in the photo? Can't wait to see in in whatever project you decide to put it in.

[anna]

Actually, you know little about me,either.


I am an Antiques Dealer,of many years expierience...so I sell on a daily basis.
I am also an Ebay seller.....but I only buy for personal use,not for my occupation.

I would not wish to suggest that Philip has been duped,as the seller clearly stated what he had for sale....

I have seen these photo's copied so well,it is difficult to tell a copy from the original....that's all....nobody mentioned a photo album or the circumstances of the purchase in Phil's original post.

It was nothing personal against Philip at all.Infact,I am more than pleased that he has had a good find.

ANNA

[Rob Clack]

Philip showed me the photo about a year back. The original and not a copy (and I still give him ear ache about bringing originals out with him and not copies). And I have no doubts whatsoever about the photos authenticity or that it is Dutfields Yard. The warehouses Neil mentioned are the Commercial Road Goods Depot. and Warehouse, on the Gower Walk side and not as I first thought buildings in Back Church Lane.
And I do remember the eBay listing and thinking at the time it didn't look like much. If I realized at the time it was Dutfields Yard it would have gone for a lot more than the $4. Philip paid for it.

That's just my opinion, but what do I know.

Rob

[Celesta]

It seems that Philip has seen and handled a lot of old photos. I know he is a collector. Why assume that he doesn't know an old photo when he sees one? And why assume the worst and say that he's trying to play games with people? Frankly, I don't believe it. I would think that a Ripper conference would be a proper place to submit this picture for viewing by other Ripperologists, and that is what he did. Anyone here would take the appropriate precautions to protect the photo and their rights to it, before they released it to the public. Let's try and have a little patience.

[anna]

OK.....that's it folks....let's just stop here and take note..

I...ANNA...do not think Philip is trying to dupe anybody.....nor do I think he doesn't know an old photograph when he sees it...

I didn't know I suggested either of these things...

I am quite offended that anyone would suggest I would do either.

I merely remarked upon what I had read.


ANNA.

[Celesta]

OK.....that's it folks....let's just stop here and take note..

I...ANNA...do not think Philip is trying to dupe anybody.....nor do I think he doesn't know an old photograph when he sees it...

I didn't know I suggested either of these things...

I am quite offended that anyone would suggest I would do either.

I merely remarked upon what I had read.My occupation alone makes me cautious.

Oh,boy....beam me up,Scottie!!!!!!!

ANNA.

Hello Anna,

Hold the phone, Kid-oh! Nobody thinks you're accusing anybody of anything! You clearly said you weren't in your post. You have the background and expertise which makes you qualified to ask questions. They are perfectly valid questions. My impression of what you said was that you were speaking in general. One does have to be careful, esp. as you point out, with some of the dealers who offer reprints. I thought it had been mentioned somewhere back in the heap, maybe on another thread. No offense meant, my friend. Sorry if it seemed like I was attacking you.

Best,

Cel

[anna]

Hi Cel,

No problem.


ANNA.x

[Monty]

What do you know indeed?

Rob,

You pointed out the angle of those warehouse roofs and provided another photo of them from a different angel didnt you?

I remember them matching the ones on Phils photo.

There is no one who knows the area and its buildings past and present like Rob, Phil, Jake, Colin and John. All have been consulted and all agree.